Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Introduction
leadership, resulting in myriad school leadership theories and models. Each new study expands
the knowledge base of what it means to be an effective school leader and clarifies the impact of
effective leadership across the business specter, and its connection to school leadership is
currently being explored. The emotional intelligence of school leaders plays a role in school
improvement, helping to fill the gaps in current research as to which leadership competencies
This literature review will discuss the evolution of emotional intelligence research,
including the three most prevalent models by Salovey and Mayer, Bar-On, and Goleman. Next,
the research on the traits and behaviors of effective school principals, including a specific focus
on those in the middle grades settings, will be examined. Finally, the connections between
emotional intelligence and the traits and behaviors of effective school principals, as well as the
As of yet, no one leadership theory, no set of characteristics, no list of behaviors have answered
the question of why effective principals are effective. That is because successful leaders have a
human focus which can‘t be defined through a set of practices; they must have the ability to
work with a variety of different people, motivating them and helping them achieve the goals of
the organization (Hauser, 2001). Daniel Goleman, author of several books and articles on
emotional intelligence, calls these leaders emotionally intelligent. Emotional intelligence (EI) is
―the capacity for recognizing our own feelings and those of others, for motivating ourselves
and for managing emotions effectively in ourselves and others‖ (Hay Group, 2005, p. 2). Justice
& Espinoza (2007) state that, ―. . . emotional intelligence is the single most important
influencing variable in personal achievement, career success, leadership and life satisfaction.‖
While this claim might sound a bit overstated, there are a number of research studies that point
to a definitive relationship between a person‘s EI and their personal and professional success. EI
is not an inherent trait, nor is it a behavior. Based on the same concept as the IQ model, it is an
intelligence model that encompasses a person‘s capacity to perceive, understand and manage
emotions (Mayer & Salovey, 1997). Emotional intelligence is much more than just
demonstrating an upbeat personality; it is the ability to understand how one‘s emotions can
impact the moods and performance of others around him in both positive and negative ways.
EI versus IQ
The basic premise upholding the study of EI is that general intelligence, i.e., IQ, is not the best
indicator of life and workplace success (Goldenberg, Matheson & Mantler, 2006). In fact,
Goleman (1995, 1998b) asserts that EI matters more than IQ in determining who will be a more
productive employee and who will be a better leader. The more demanding and intellectually
challenging the job is, the more this difference comes into play. IQ and technical skills are
performance in a variety of different jobs. In these studies, IQ accounted for only 4% to 25% of
job success, while as much as 90% of that success could be linked to EI (Goleman, 1998b).
Additional studies on the impact of emotional intelligence and workplace success show that
emotional intelligence accounts for 85% of the difference between high-performing workers and
workers that are labeled as average (Cook, 2006). In part, this can be attributed to the leader‘s
actions and mood. Studies looking at working climate alone can rate an organization as high or
low performing with 75% accuracy (Bardach, 2008), thus, it is imperative that leaders be able to
affect climate. Emotionally competent leaders positively impact the working climate, which
permeates the productivity of the entire organization. General leadership studies have shown
that emotional intelligence outweighs job experience and IQ as a predictor of successful job
performance (Buntrock, 2008). Therefore, when comparing technical skills, IQ and EI for
highly effective leaders, EI was twice as important as the other factors in all jobs and
This does not mean that IQ and EI are conflicting or opposing forces, or that IQ is not important
or necessary; in fact, they are completely separate competencies and one does not impact the
other (Goleman, 1995). A person can have high IQ and low EI, or just the opposite, or any
combination thereof. It does appear from the research that IQ should be a prerequisite for
professional employment. However, it is EI, more so than IQ, that unlocks a person‘s full
potential in workplace success, giving him the ability to focus on his work, to think clearly and
Some critics state that EI is just a glorified new name for what has been known for years in
psychological research as personality psychology (Matthews, Roberts & Zeidner, 2004; Mayer
& Cobb, 2000). In one sense, this is true – EI has been talked about for decades with labels such
the research on EI goes beyond mere personality traits as an indicator of life success. EI
includes factors, such as personality traits, which are an indication of a person‘s potential for
learning and demonstrating practical emotional skills; but, a person who is identified as
emotionally intelligent also has the ability to convert and apply that intelligence, which is what
The term emotional intelligence was coined by Salovey and Mayer in 1990 who introduced it as
an intelligence model framed on the work of the IQ model, only dealing with emotions instead
of cognition (Salovey & Mayer, 1990). Their initial framework was further revised in 1997,
which focuses on how emotions contribute to intelligent thought and cognition, and also how
emotional reasoning contributes to decisions and actions in everyday life (Mayer & Salovey,
1997).
The branches of their model are arranged from relatively basic psychological processes, which
include perception, appraisal and expression of emotion on the first branch, to more complex
psychologically integrated processes which require reflective regulation of emotions on the
fourth and last branch. Each branch is split into four abilities, for a total of 16 emotional
intelligence abilities. These abilities are then organized from early developing abilities to
abilities that take longer to develop. An outline of Salovey & Mayer‘s Four-Branch Model of
those feelings
Emotions are sufficiently vivid and available that they can be generated as aids to judgment
• Ability to label emotions and recognize relations among the words and the
• Ability to stay open to feelings, both those that are pleasant and those that
are unpleasant
such as recognizing how clear, typical, influential, or reasonable they are Ability
may convey
Since Salovey and Mayer introduced the concept twenty years ago, two other widely accepted
Bar-On extended the work of Salovey and Mayer, framing the idea of EI in terms of well-being
and behavior (Bar-On, 1997; Goleman, 1995). Bar-On‘s model offers a broader perspective on
emotional intelligence than Salovey and Mayer. His model encompasses both social and
emotional factors when developing and measuring EI. He asserts that emotional and social
competencies are interrelated and the combination of these determine how well we can manage
ourselves, interact and relate with others, and manage the daily challenges of life. The Bar-On
model is based on the idea that highlevels of social and emotional functioning will lead to high
The Bar-On model (1997) identifies five overall meta-factors that conceptualize
emotional-social intelligence. Each of the meta-factors is broken down into subfactors of related
competencies, skills and facilitators. Overall, there are 15 emotional intelligence subfactors
described and measured by Bar-On‘s model. An outline of the Bar-On model follows.
• Emotional self-awareness
Assertiveness
• Independence
• Self-actualization
• Empathy
• Social responsibility
Interpersonal relationship
• Stress tolerance
• Impulse control
• Reality
• Flexibility
• Problem solving
• Optimism
• Happiness
Bar-On (1997), like other EI researchers, upholds the idea that when we can make our emotions
work for us and not against us, we will be happier, better-adjusted and more effective in many
Goleman extended Bar-On‘s concept of life effectiveness by focusing on the role of EI in life
success, work performance and leadership (Goleman, 1995, 1998a, 1998b, 2000; Goleman,
Boyatzis & McKee, 2001). Unlike the other models, which provide assessment of an
individual‘s EI and how that contributes to personal well-being and life satisfaction, Goleman‘s
model measures EI and how that contributes to an individual‘s impact on the workplace.
Although the other models have been used in research to measure workplace effectiveness,
Goleman‘s model is the only one with a specific focus centered on EI competencies as they
What are the emotional competencies leading to greater success in life and the workplace?
grouped into four overall clusters (Hay Group, 2005) (See Table 2.1).
In summary, these three conceptual frameworks have led to three different models guiding
Goleman Model -- An array of emotional and social competencies that contribute to managerial
performance.
CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
intelligence education into an elementary 6th grade classroom will increase the academic scores
of standardize testing and improve their performance in regular classroom testing. The focus
will be on two 6th grade classrooms taught by the same teacher in a Midwestern Urban
elementary school. The classes that are taught have the same curriculum objectives and lesson
plans. One class will receive emotional intelligence lessons once a day for the entire school year
and the other class will receive no additional emotional intelligence education. I will gather
quantitative data in the form of end of the year testing scores and data. The data acquired will be
compared against each other. The research will investigate and correlation between the
Research Design
The research will compare the findings of the two classrooms. Group I is the
independent variable. They will receive emotional intelligence education once daily for an
entire year. Group II is not an independent variable. They will be taught in the traditional way
without any emotional intelligence education. The dependent variable will be the summative
standard testing scores and the formative testing score from their regular class. If there is a
relationship between emotional education and student achievement then Group I will have a
measurable increase in their scores while Group II will not have any significant increase.
Instrumentation